Green Marketing: Coffee Sustainability and Responsible Consumption

This paper explores the responsible consumption and production sustainability goal concerning coffee production, brands, and consumption. It discusses the challenges and analyzes highly sustainable and poorly sustainable coffee brands. The paper also includes a PESTLE analysis and a 4 Ps analysis of sustainable coffee brands.

Running Head: GREEN MARKETING
Coffee Green Marketing
Name:
Academic Affiliation:
Date

GREEN MARKETING 2
Introduction
Sustainable development goals are actions called on the global arena to eliminate scarcity
of consumable products, safeguard the planet and ensure an all-inclusive goodwill and prosperity
to all people (Zeender, 2018). The following paper thus explores the responsible consumption
and production sustainability goal concerning coffee production, brands, and consumption. The
17 Goals covers different areas such as sustainable consumption economic disparity, creativity,
climate change, peace, and justices among other priorities.
Responsible and consumption production Goal aims at achieving economic growth and
sustainable development through proper utilization of the production resources to sustain today
and future production (Bueno et al., 2018). The natural resources do not only require protection
on the production process but also require protection from the harmful disposal of wastes and
pollutants, therefore, it is equal responsibility of both the business and the consumers to reduces
and recycle the products and wastes. With the high rate of global population increase, it is
estimated that by the time it will click about 9.6 billion, in 2030, there will be a requirement of
almost three equal planets to sustain the number (Pfeiffer, Middeke & Tambour, 2017).
However, with the current little and the natural resources, human life will be difficult and
enjoyable, thus the call of all stakeholders to sustain the available natural resources.
The greatest challenge with the Responsible consumption and production goal is poor
integration between environmental sustainability alongside economic growth and welfare. Since
the goal aims at “doing more and better production with less” the net gain of some companies
tends to reduce, thus make such companies find it difficult in complying with the terms and
conditions of the goal (Briant, 2017). For example, it is estimated that around $1 million of food

GREEN MARKETING 3
ends up in the dustbins of both the retailers and consumers. Waste affects the environment
through poor food-related energy consumption and waste generation. Secondly, the
overconsumption of food tends to be harmful to our health for more than 2 billion people in the
world are overweight. The global coffee consumption tends to stand at around 157.38 million of
60 kg bags per year, and the user tends to increase. Over the previous years, scholars have linked
coffee consumption to the significant number of benefits such as cognitive activation. However,
high consumption of unfiltered coffee is associated with the elevations of cholesterol levels and
heart diseases and that why in 2017 Norwegians were warned against unfiltered coffee.
PESTLE Analysis
Political
Over the past few years, there have been increasing standards related to the coffee
industry to ensure ethical, social, and economic and environmentally production process. The
high coffee criterion concerning health has led to the development of political prominence in the
coffee industry. Thus many countries; exporters and importers, have designed different
regulations that have recently affected the relationships between the countries (Elder, Lister &
Dauvergne, 2014). The increasing restrictions have generally increased the demand and prices
affecting the sustainability issues since various companies such as Starbucks and Tesco have
embarked on fair trade to gain a socially responsible reputation and relation with the consumers
and the society. Consequently, Starbucks tends to find it difficult to operate in anti-American
countries due to a high level of sentiments and violence against those franchises.

GREEN MARKETING 4
Economical Factor
Coffee production is part of agriculture and has a great impact on the livelihood of
people. The coffee production impact was much stronger in the Brazilian economy since it
amounted to about 63% of the Brazilian exports and 16 % of the US gross domestic product in
2015. The exportation of the coffee tends to earn producing countries substantial revenues used
in impacting economic growth (Lorena et al., 2017).
Social Factor
Over the past few years, a large number of people have become health conscious,
resulting in many young people to shy always from consuming coffee. It is estimated that global
coffee consumption has dropped and allowed the rise of alternatives to hot drinks such as soy-
milk and herbal teas. The global attitude change towards coffee has offered other companies
such as Starbucks an opportunity to date a cheaper alternative.
Technological Factor
Over the past years, technological advancement has impacted every aspect of human life.
Currently, a large number of coffee consumers prefer buying from supermarkets that have a
varied number of coffee premium such as ice blended coffee, cappuccinos among many others
that are easily manufactured from the hi-tech equipment’s (Yasue et al., 2018). The development
of better brewing techniques have positively impacted the global coffee production, and thus the
production process is not limited to big companies alone. However, the technological
advancement might negatively affect big companies such as Starbucks since many people can
access homemade coffee as a result of the cheap coffee making machines. The wide variety thus

GREEN MARKETING 5
tends to enhance the consumer's knowledge about the different specialized coffee brands in the
market as well as their taste.
Environmental Factor
Environmental issues have been on the discussion over the past few years. The need to
have a sustainable environment is significant even to the coffee production and processing since
it is dependent on environmental factors such as rain, drought, poor harvest and earthquakes
(Hughes et al., 2014). Coffee consumption is also influenced by weather change; for example,
there is high consumption during cold than during hot conditions, resulting in different sales
collection. Consequently, as the third global consumed the beverage, coffee production has
increased over the past few years resulting into different environmental impacts such as
deforestation for more land in Central America and Latin America, water pollution and
contamination from the coffee industry discharge and reduction of soil quality through the sun
cultivation process.
4 Ps Analysis of highly sustainable brands
Sustainable product brands refer to a product that poses an additional characteristic that is
valuable in terms of social and environmental benefits to the consumers. Coffee has numerous
brands such as Nescafe, Jacobs, Maccona, and Espresso among many others (Gold, S., Kunz, N.,
& Reiner, G. (2017).). The highly sustainable coffee brands Nescafe and Jacobs and Nescafe are
one of the highly durable coffee products produced by Nestle, one of the world food and
beverage company. Both brands have managed to embrace some of the guidelines placed to
ensure responsible consumption and production concerning the marketing mix. Marketing mix

GREEN MARKETING 6
helps in analyzing the brand marketing ability with a focus on the product, price, promotion, and
place.
Product
Nescafe brand aims at satisfying the customer’s taste buds, through the introduction of
different blends such as Nescafe Original Blend and Gold Blend Decafe. Both Nescafe and
Jacobs derive the coffee raw material from the organic farming that helps in securing the
environment from the chemical disposal, thus supports sustainable production. The wide blend
variety tends to cater to a wide range of coffee lovers. Similarly, Jacobs coffee has a wide range
of taste from the blend of both the Arabic and Robusta, thus can give an instant wake-up call in
the morning; therefore, it attracts different customers together (Shaaban & Mostafa, 2018).
Consequently, Jacobs use high technology of freeze-drying that promotes sustainability by
reducing the environmental pollution and loss of food during the processing.
Price
The price of both the Jacobs and Nescafe brand is dependent on the quality, competitors,
and demand in the market. The product is always priced relatively low due to the high quality
and customer’s affordability, to target a single cup of coffee customers (Valkila, 2014). The
pricing has made s sustainability champion since it sells at a relatively low price without
consideration of the high-quality aspects.
Place
Over the past few years, Nescafe brand has become a household name as a result of the
experiences it poses to the customers around the world. Due to the popularity, the product always

GREEN MARKETING 7
has high demand, thus has proper strategies such as huge cycle distribution method and
intermediaries to ensure that the brand reaches the required place in time (olynczuk & Pantti,
2017). Both brands use “clean idle trucks” in distributing their product to various destinations
and also encourage recycling at different warehouses as a strategy to curb both consumption and
precious resources available.
Promotion
The promotion strategy of Nescafe has ensured that there is consistent communication
with potential customers through various advertisement channels such as radio, television,
internet, and papers. Additionally, the Nescafe brand has ensured the originality of the logo for
all the period, thus imprinted itself on the customer’s mind, facilitating easy identification and
remembrance for repurchase and referrals to other customers. Jacobs brand has managed to
increase awareness through the creation of “family warmth and friendship.” Jacobs facilitated
this through the establishment of green branding tents that were situated in various points for
people to enjoy their coffee. The green branding tents were signs of ensuring responsible
consumption of the product.
Analysis of poorly sustainable brands
The most considered poorly performing coffee brands concerning the sustainability
issues; Responsible consumption and production are coffee pods. The coffer brands either do not
embrace the fair trade, technological production and organic production thus resulting in either
environmental pollution, production of harmful products and overutilization of the natural
resources. The poor sustainable coffer brands are coffee pods and eight o’clock.

GREEN MARKETING 8
Packaging
Packaging is meant to protect the product and offer marketability. Coffee pods such as
Keurig K-Cups mostly use plastic as the main packaging material, thus due the various recent
government bans on the plastic, the coffee pods tend to lose grip on the customers since they are
not in alignment with the sustainability requirement.
Place
The coffee pods tend to reach various customers through different distribution channels
that are not appealing to the environmental sustainability requirement. Most of the pods get
transported in plastic packaging that at the end of the day ends up in landfills. Eight o’clock
packaging is detrimental to the environment since they are non-biodegradable; thus
environmental conscious customers tend to shy away from such a product.
Pricing
The pricing of both the eight o’clock and coffee pods tend to be more as compared to
other brands that are relatively low and offer high quality. A pound of coffee pod cost over 50
pounds, and the amount is so little as compared to the quantity. The relatively high prices are as a
result of poor production techniques (Gringarten, H. (2018). For example, the eight o’clock still
depend on the old systems of production that are costly and less sustainable regarding the
production, the high production cost is eventually transferred to the final consumer thus does not
comply with responsible consumption goal.

GREEN MARKETING 9
Promotion
The eight o’clock is not extensively recognized by young coffee drinkers due to the poor
promotion strategies that were initially adopted. The promotion and advertising majorly focused
on the old age customers who were known to be taking coffee at eight in the morning and eight
in the evening. The promotional strategy adopted by coffee pod brands makes it difficult for a
large number of consumers to access the products (Gringarten, 2018). The brands are always
limited in supermarkets since most of the machines are not always available. Both the coffee
pods and the eight o’clock have poor customer signing methods, that end failing to attract the
attention of potential customers.
Place
The place marketing mix of the coffee pods tends to be poor regarding sustainability
issue. The brands rely mostly on the plastic as the packaging, thus tends to take large space in the
transportation system. The large space spikes up the production cost, thus affecting the
sustainability production goal.
Summary
The responsible consumption and production sustainability goal concerning coffee has
been in the debates over the past years, the companies have taken tremendous steps in embracing
the sustainability practices, however, their need more responsibilities to be done. The
sustainability responsibilities are:
The first sustainability responsibility for most of the coffee companies needs to identify
systematic tools that will help in balancing both social and environmental sustainability

GREEN MARKETING 10
alongside economic sustainability (Slade & Carter, 2017). The trading practices should be a
platform that provided both farmers with a gateway to the international supply chain as well as
the opportunity to play major roles in influencing the terms of the facing trade procedures.
Systematic interventions such as improving the coffee producer information on the markets and
cost through proper dissemination tools work as an effective tool in eliminating sustainability
issues and promoting long-term production.
The second strategic sustainability responsibility is providing contractual training to the
coffee producer. A proper understanding of both the rights and obligations among the coffee
producer’s is significant in eliminating unnecessary defaults in the processing system, that either
hike up the pricing or results in harmful products(Celia, Avila & Barcelos, 2018). The coffee
producer with string contracting capacity can participate in the contract formation actively thus
facilitates transparency, clarity, and predictability in sustainable trading relationships.

GREEN MARKETING 11
References
Briant, C. J. (2017). Unheard voices: a critical discourse analysis of the Millennium
Development Goals’ evolution into the Sustainable Development Goals. Third World
Quarterly, 38(1), 16–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2016.1166944
Bueno, J., Thomas, R., Gauter, C., Havkwist, A., Hoddy, R., Larasati, A., Smith, R. A. (2018).
Monitoring the sustainable development goals through human rights accountability
reviews. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 96(9), 627–633.
https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.17.204412
Celia, P. L., Avila P. E., & Barcelos A. N. (2018). Sustainability, Organizations and Training of
Managers: An Exploratory Research on Business Administration Courses in Rio Grande
Do Sul. Brazilian Journal of Management / Revista de Administração Da UFSM, 11,
1324–1343. https://doi.org/10.5902/1983465916473
Cucurachi, S., & Suh, S. (2017). Cause-effect analysis for sustainable development
policy. Environmental Reviews, 25(3), 358–379. https://doi.org/10.1139/er-2016-0109
Elder, S. D., Lister, J., & Dauvergne, P. (2014). Big retail and sustainable coffee: A new
development studies research agenda. Progress in Development Studies, 14(1), 77–90.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1464993413504354
Gold, S., Kunz, N., & Reiner, G. (2017). Sustainable Global Agrifood Supply Chains: Exploring
the Barriers. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 21(2), 249–260.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12440

GREEN MARKETING 12
Gringarten, H. (2018). Price and Store Image as Mitigating Factors in the Perception and
Evaluation of Retailers’ Customer-Based Brand Equity. Journal of Multidisciplinary
Research (1947-2900), 10(1/2), 51–84. Retrieved from
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?
direct=true&db=aph&AN=130633634&site=ehost-live
Hughes, S., López, J., Jones, M., Moser, B., Cox, E., Lindquist, M., Brunner, L. (2014).
Sustainable conversion of coffee and other crop wastes to biofuels and bioproducts using
coupled biochemical and thermochemical processes in a multi-stage biorefinery
concept. Applied Microbiology & Biotechnology, 98(20), 8413–8431.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-014-5991-1
Lorena , J., Eduardo, J., Rodrígue, J., & Prías, O. (2017). Indicators of energetic performance: A
path to sustainability. “A case study of a high-roasting industry of
coffee.” Dyna, 84(203), 184–191. https://doi.org/10.15446/dyna.v84n203.65336
Olynczuk, K., & Pantti, M. (2017). Branded Solidarity in Fair Trade Communication on
Facebook. Globalizations, 14(1), 66–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/14747731.2016.1175099
Pfeiffer, A., Middeke, F., & Tambour, M. (2017). 2030 agenda for sustainable development:
Implications for official statistics. Statistical Journal of the IAOS, 33(4), 911–918.
https://doi.org/10.3233/SJI-170360
Shaaban, H., & Mostafa, A. (2018). Sustainable Eco-Friendly Ultra-High-Performance Liquid
Chromatographic Method for Simultaneous Determination of Caffeine and Theobromine
in Commercial Teas: Evaluation of Greenness Profile Using NEMI and Eco-Scale

GREEN MARKETING 13
Assessment Tools. Journal of AOAC International, 101(6), 1781–1787.
https://doi.org/10.5740/jaoacint.18-0084
Slade, C., & Carter, J. (2017). Local Governance for Social Sustainability: equity as a strategic
response to neoliberal constraints in food security initiatives. Australian
Geographer, 48(3), 385–399. https://doi.org/10.1080/00049182.2016.1265882
Valkila, J. (2014). Do Fair Trade Pricing Policies Reduce Inequalities in Coffee Production and
Trade? Development Policy Review, 32(4), 475–493. https://doi.org/10.1111/dpr.12064
Yasue, N. R., Silva R. M., Terezinha K. C., & Drebes P. C. (2018). Towards sustainability
through incremental innovation of a low cost product: the Nespresso case. GeSec:
Revista de Gestao e Secretariado, 9(2), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.7769/gesec.v9i2.789
Zeender, G. (2018). The Sustainable Development Goals and IDPs. Forced Migration Review,
(59), 24–26. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?
direct=true&db=aph&AN=132579793&site=ehost-live